tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN January 4, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PST
honest but many years ago. we are doing very well with our negotiation with china. we pretty much concluded our negotiation with canada, with mexico. we have done the deal and signed a deal with south korea, which a lot of people said would be impossible. it's a good deal. it was a horrible deal. it's a good deal. i think a lot of this has to do with the fact that already companies are moving back into our country that have left our country in some cases. in some cases they're moving back because they want to be here, but in many cases these are automobile companies that have left and gone to other countries and now they're coming back to the united states. so it's nice to see. one of the things that's so beautiful to watch is 3.2% wage growth. that hasn't happened in so long for our country. that's an incredible thing. that means people are actually getting more money, taking home more money and that's something
that's really nice to see. a lot of you have been following me when we were on a thing called a campaign, that was an exciting campaign, a great campaign. and i used to talk about wages going down, not going up, but going down for years, 19 years and now they just went up 3.2% and yet there's no inflation because other things are going down like the price of your gasoline at the tank. it's low. and that doesn't happen by luck. i work hard on that. that's like a tax cut for people. so a lot of good things are happening. labor participation rate increased to 63.1. that's an incredible number also. i just wanted to bring that out. the economy is very good. remember, from the time of my election, the stock market's gone up very close to 30%, and that's with all.
things that are happening, and there are a lot of things happening. we have a massive trade negotiation going on with china, president xi is very much involved, so am i. we're dealing at the highest levels and we're doing very well. we're doing very well. in the meantime we've taken in billions and billions of dollars in tariffs from china and from others. our steel industry has come roaring back and that makes me very happy. i think we'll have to build a steel wall as opposed to a concrete wall because we have steel companies again. so we had a productive meeting today with speaker pelosi and senator schumer. i thought it was really a very, very good meeting. we're all on the same path in terms of wanting to get government open. we're going to be meeting -- i've designated a group and
we're going to be meeting over the weekend, that group, to determine what we're going to do about the border. really i want to thank a lot of the border patrol people and i.c.e. people who came up yesterday. they had a tremendous impact on i think a lot of democrats yesterday but a lot of people because they were able to lay out exactly what the problem is. one of the problems, for example, your ports of entry, we're going to agree with chuck and nancy and steny and dick durbin was there and we're going to agree that -- and we want to -- make the ports bigger, more powerful, able to handle more traffic, have very, very powerful drug equipment there. so they make very good stuff now. we don't have it because of budgets and other reasons, but we're going to make our ports of entry very powerful, very
strong. we're going to have the best drug finding equipment anywhere in the world. they make it much better today than they made it even two years ago. and i explained to them the problem is, though, we can have a wonderful port of entry but you have 2,000 miles of border between the united states and mexico and if you take a look and you see like we do through certain technology, including cameras in airplanes, not just drones, you'll see vast numbers of vehicles driving through the desert and entering where you don't have a very powerful fence or a wall. that happened this week where a wonderful young police officer, i spoke to his wife yesterday, where he was shot, viciously shot for simply stopping a person that came over the border illegally. got shot, killed. and took the most beautiful
picture just hours before, a chris myself picture. we don't want that happening. but i was explained, too, and i explained to people because it's really common sense, so you have ports of entry and we have great security at the ports of entry and then you may have fencing or walls up and down left and right, east and west but they stop because we don't have proper border security. these people have vehicles. and they drive to the right. they're not going through where we have great border patrol officers and i.c.e. officers and military now, the military's done a fantastic job. they don't stop. they go right to the easiest part and the weakest part, sometimes out in desert but you have miles and miles and miles of unprotected area and you can see where they drive over. you even have people walking that trek and that's a very
dangerous trek. and they bring children or even worse they use children. you know, children are the biggest beneficiaries of what we want to do. children are hurt more than anybody else. these coyotes, what they do with children all because we have open borders because they think they can get away with it. they don't come in through the port where we have a lot of protection. they come in through empty areas, vast spaces, empty areas, just like this terrible person came in when he shot officer singh. you don't even have a sign saying mexico/u.s. there's no sign designating that you have just entered the u.s. there's just open space. i splind thexplained that to nai
and chuck schumer. one of the things that happens there is human traffickers, maybe that's the worst of all where you'll have traffickers having three or four women with tape on their mouths and tied up sitting in the back of a van or a car and they'll drive that van or the car not through a port of entry where we have very talented people that look for every little morsel of drugs or even people or whatever they're looking for, they're not going to go there. they get off the road and they drive out into the desert, they make a left turn, usually it's a left, not a right, most of them come out because in san diego and areas of california we just finished brand new walls, beautiful walls, steel walls and they wanted them badly. they were asking us. that's why we did it there. i said let's not do it in california. california always complains through their great governors. they're always complaining. i said let's not do it, let the
governor ask us but they really needed it, having tremendous problems. and we built a brand new wall in san diego and it's doing really well. you should go and look at it. it's amazing, it's incredible how it works. these coyotes and human traffickers make a right turn before they get to the port of entry, they go as far as the wall is or as far as the barricade is and then they make a left, welcome to the united states and what they do with usually the women, sometimes children that they're trafficking with and in, you don't want to know about. so the only way you're going to stop that is by having a solid steel structure or concrete structure, whether it's a wall or some form of very powerful steel. now the steel is actually more expensive than the concrete, but i think we're probably talking
about steel because i really feel the other side feels better about it. and i can understand what they're saying. it is more expensive. we mentioned the price that we want $5.6 billion, very strongly because numbers are thrown around, 1.6, 2.1, 2.5. this is national security we're talking about. we're not talking about games. we're talking about national security. this should have been done by all of the presidents that preceded me and they all know it. some of them have told me that we should have done it. so we're not playing games. we have to do it. and just remember, human traffickers, remember drugs. the drugs are pouring into this country. they don't go through the ports of entry. when they do, they sometimes get caught. when we finish and the democrats do want this, they want ports of entry strengthened and i want to do that, too.
in fact, we have it down. it's about $400 million. and we could have the best equipment in the world. now what they'll do if we have the protection and we have strong ports of entry with this incredible drug-finding equipment, i don't know what they're going to do because they're not coming in through past the steel gates or the steel walls or the concrete walls depending on what's happening because we meeting this weekend. we have a group, i've set up a group, they are going to tell us who their group of experts and probably people in the senate and congressmen and women are going to come and we have three. i said give us three then i said you know what, send over nine or six or three or two, doesn't matter, send over whoever you want but it's common sense. so now when they make that turn, they make it and now all of a
sudden they can't go any further and they have to go back. and that's going to stop the caravans for two reasons. number one, they're not going to be able to get through but when they realize they can't get through, what's going to happen? they're not going to form and they're not going to try and come up. and they can apply for asylum and they can most importantly they can apply for citizenship because the companies that i told you that created these great job numbers, they're incredible job numbers beyond anybody's expectations, i don't think there was one wall street genius of which i know many of them, but they're not geniuses, there's not one that predicted anywhere close to these job numbers. i thought they were going to be good, but there wasn't one that i saw. so now we have everything so beautifully handled. we need to have, however, we need border security.
and all of this security, if we do what i think what the democrats want, all of the border things that we'll be building will be done right here in the good old usa by steel companies that were practically out of business when i came into office as president and now they're thriving. you call up the heads of u.s. steel and i could name ten companies, you look at what's going on in the steel industry, it's almost a miracle. it's a dead industry. we need steel for defense, we need steel for a lot of things, steel and aluminum. but those industries were in deep trouble, the steel industry was almost dead and now it's a very, very vibrant history stin. i'm going to ask mike pence to say a few words. we put together a team of people negotiating over the weekend,
they'll be negotiating on the border, the look, on different things having to do with border security, including at the ports of entry and i think they're going to be very successful. because i found the democrats really want to do something. so we're at 5.6 if you look at it, $5.6 billion but we are able to also in addition to that because what we want to do has to be done properly and we're negotiating very tough prices, very, very tough because you heard much high aer numbers. you heard 20 and 25 billion in daca. what happened is when a judge incredibly because it was an incredibly i will say wrong decision, in fact president obama when he signed the daca with the executive order made a statement to the effect this isn't going to work. and some judge from the ninth circuit, here we go again,
upheld it. and then it was upheld by the ninth circuit appellate and now it's going before the united states supreme court and hopefully that will be properly adjudicated because if it is, talks will begin on larger immigration matters having to do with daca, having to do with other things. so that is taking place. we may add a few things on to our discussions over the weekend, but i'm going to ask mike pence and then we'll take a couple of questions. but we're very proud of the jobs and job numbers. that was incredible. i think i'll be even more proud if we can have great border security for the first time in really the history of our country, the southern border is a dangerous, horrible disaster. we've done a great job but you can't really do the kind of job we have to do unless you have a
major powerful barrier and that's what we're going to have to have. so first we start with mike pence. >> thank you, mr. president. we are nearly two weeks into a government shutdown, but our nation is also in the midst of a crisis on our southern border. today president trump convened for the second time this week republican and democrat leaders from the congress to address both issues. we are truly grateful for the candid and constructive dialogue that took place here today here at the white house with speaker pelosi and senator hum schumer
we look forward to continued dialogue over the course of the weekend. make no mistake about it, we're in the midst of a crisis at our southern border. every day nearly 2,000 people are apprehended or stopped attempting to come into our country that have no lawful claim to be here. last year alone 17,000 -- >> okay, we're going to hop back in if the president takes questions but you and i both listened to that. what i heard and i've got julie hirschfeld davis and gloria borger with us. i heard a lot of red meat, red meat, red meat, i didn't hear anything about the 800,000 government employees affected by this government shutdown which of course beoth the democrats ad republicans are to blame for but gloria, what did you make of that? >> first of all, i made the president was clearly told to stay on message about the jobs
number and to brag about it because he doesn't often brag about the economy, which one would argue he should brag about so he did that. but i think this were people coming out of a meeting telling two very different stories. just as the chyron on the screen shows, trump called the meeting productive and the democrats called it very, very contentious. chuck schumer mentioned that the president mentioned to shut down the government for months, if not years. you did not hear the president talk about that. you haeshd the president talk about a productive meeting, they're going to have a working group that's going to meet again over this weekend, but it's very hard from listening to the president to figure out aside from spending money to beef up the ports of entry to this country, it's very hard to figure out where, you know, where they would come out on the same side on this story. i mean, he went off on this long story that after they come in, they take a detour and then the
border is open, but we didn't -- we heard very, very different stories from the democrats and the republicans. so i'm kind of just scratching my head about where, if anywhere, there was any kind of agreement or a place where they could start negotiating. >> total difference between these two groups. i don't think any of us will have the answer to this but this came out. president's mouth. he said this should have been done, border security and including the wall, this should have been done by all of the presidents preceding me and they all know it. some of them have told me they should have done it. i don't know who he'd be referring to. i don't think anyone knows who he would have been referring to there. jump in if you think you do. but, julie, do you get the sense that any progress was made?
>> well, i mean, irguess at t gs point that i consider it progress they're continuing to talk and he's appointing a team to try to iron this out. to this point there has been so little of that. normally in the run-up to a government shutdown deadline there's frenzied communication and we haven't seen any of that. in the last couple of weeks we've seen remarkably little communication between the two sides. nancy pelosi said she thought it was progress just that the two sides seemed to be honing in on what each other's positions are but those are still very far apart. >> it sounds like in hearing president he said we're on the same path, we both want the government to reopen. it's like saying we're on the same page because we both believe the sky is blue. but what does progress look
like? go ahead, go ahead. >> and to your point, you know, if you believe what democrats said when they went out to the microphones after the meeting, they're not on the same page because the president is privately telling them he's willing to keep the government closed for months and even years, that's not the same message that the democrats have, we want to reopen the government, at least let's pass the bills that doesn't having in to do with border security. and the other thing is steel versus concrete, you could read that as the beginning of a pivot for him to where he's going to claim that fencing and the kind of replacement barriers that democrats have supported funding for in the past are in fact the wall and that's what he wanted all along and if they can agree upon a number, maybe that's the solution. the problem there is that they've also insisted on
language, democrats have and republicans have agreed for the past two years for saying none of that money can be spent on a wall. that are going to have to be able to square that circle some way. >> there's steve scalise, vice president pence is there. where's mitch mcconnell? >> i think he made it very clear before the recess that his senate was only going to vote on something after the president signed off because they didn't want to have the rug pulled out from under them. and i don't think that mcconnell wants to be a part of this right now and i think that's just where he has been. i think what we've just got i don't know sort of a statement from mcconnell which applauded the fact that there is going to be a working group of staff led by pence that's going to meet over the weekend, as julie was
saying. that is a step in the right direction, but whether they're going to be able to reach any more agreement than they did today, who knows. particularly when you have this threat from the president hanging over their head which says i don't really care about these 800,000 federal workers who may not be able to pay their bills, et cetera, i'm going to stick by this on the wall. >> you heard a lot more about the wall and also appropriately staying on the jobs numbers, i don't think i heard anything about these 800,000 or so federal employees whatsoever. you mentioned, we talk about mitch mcconnell and it's also noteworthy that some republicans, when i say some i mean two, cory gardner and susan collins, have broken with the president, they do want to deal. they do want an end to the shutdown. do you think this is because they're feeling vulnerable looking ahead to their own reelections or might this be the beginning of something on the republican side?
>> well, i mean, i think that you saw a handful of republicans in the house actually vote for the democrats' bills last night. so there are clearly some republicans who want to be on the side of reopening the government. i think the -- >> hang on a second. let's see if he's taking questions. here we go. >> reporter: mr. president, senator schumer said the meeting from his point of view andpelos meeting was contention and he said you said the shutdown could go on often months or even a year or later. did you say that? >> i did. i did. i don't think it will but i think i can speak for republicans in the house and republicans in the house, they feel very strongly about having a safe country, about having a border that makes sense. without borders, we don't have a
country. i hope it doesn't go on even beyond a few more days. it really could open very quickly. i told them bring who you want, we have three people, you can ideally bring three, you can bring six, you can bring nine, you can bring 12. they're going to be working over the weekend. i think it may have been somewhat contentious but i think it was very productive. railro >> reporter: what was the productive part from your point of view? did the democrats move at all to your position -- >> i don't want to get into that and i don't want them to have to defend themselves to people they have to make happy. we want to save lives and we want children to be safe. the children are being decimated and i'm not talking about children in our country, i'm talking about wonderful children coming up from other places, whether it's honduras or guatemala or el salvador or
mexico or other places. we have to take care of them also. we can't let them die on the way up. what's happening to women on those caravans, you're not talking about it but it's horrible what's happening. if they know it's not going to take place because they can't get through because we have a great border wall or fence or barrier, they're not going to come um and you'p and you're no have the problem. at the same time they can apply to come into our country legally like so many people have done. we need people, major. we have to have people because we have all these companies coming in. we need great people. but we want them to come in on a merit basis and they have to come in on a merit basis. they can't come in the way they've been coming in for years. i get calls from the great tech companies and they're saying we don't allow people at the top of their class at the best schools in the country, we don't allow them to stay in our country. so they end up going back to
china and japan and so many other countries all over the world and we don't keep them. they get educated at our finest schools and then we don't allow them through a various set of circumstances to have any guarantees of staying. so we lose out on great minds. we can't do that. we have companies that if we don't change that and we're working on that and we discussed that with the democrats and i think they agreed, we're working on that. but we don't want to lose our great companies because we have a ridiculous policy that we won't accept smart people. so call it politically correct or not but we have to let these great brilliant companies have the smartest people in the world. yes, ma'am. >> reporter: mr. president, why not reopen the government to create more space to have that broader conversation? >> we think it can go very quickly. we won't be opening until it's solved. we think this is a much bigger
problem. the border is a much more dangerous problem. it's a problem of national security. it's a problem of terrorist. i talk about human traffickers, i talk about drugs and gangs but a lot of people don't say we have terrorists coming through the southern border because they find that's probably the easiest place to come through. they drive right in and make a left. not going to happen. so we're not going to do that. we won't be doing pieces. we won't be doing it in drips and drabs. i'll tell you what, i've seen a lot of people over the last week and a half, i've been right in this magnificent structure right behind you, it's called the white house. i was here on christmas and i was here -- my family was in florida. i said go to florida. and i didn't even find it to be a lonely place, there's something very special about the white house. i was here christmas, i was here on new year's eve and i will tell you the people that i've spoken with and i've gotten to meet a lot of people that i wouldn't have met, a lot of people have been coming through
the white house and explaining different things and different attitudes, a lot of people that you think are upset and certainly they're not thrilled but they say, sir, do the right thing, we need border security. and these are people that won't be getting paid. border patrol yesterday was saying, sir, we're affected by it, do what's right, it's time. this is after many, many decades, many decades. this should have taken place a long time ago. we're going to get it done. yes, ma'am. >> reporter: was daca a part of the discussions today. and why did it take this many days for a working group to come together? >> sometimes that's what happens in a negotiation. if does take longer than it should and sometimes you agree to things that could are behave agreed to two weeks ago but that's the way a negotiation is. we set out a number, $5.6 billion. we're firm on a number. we also explained that the
military is very affected, we may use the military for parts of it, homeland security is very affected. . we may in addition to the 5.6, we will use homeland security funds. so we have things happening in addition to the 5.6 but we have to get a structure built. >> reporter: was daca part of the discussion? >> thank you, mr. president. to follow up on that question, with respect to the daca program, were you discussing that in terms of a pathway to citizenship being included as part of an end to the partial sh shutdown. >> we discussed this mythical number, 25 billion, but only 2 billion up front. the rest of it the government couldn't guarantee. you remember those discussions. but where it really ened wded w when the judge ruled against and
i said as soon as that happened -- because that was a shocking decision. it was shocking to the democrats and it was more shocking to the republicans. it was an incorrect decision, it was a political decision made by a judge and i know a lot of people don't like when i say it but try going there sometime to the ninth circuit and try winning a case, not easy. everyone files right in the ninth circuit. the fact is it was a terrible decision and an incorrect decision. when that decision came down, when that judge ruled the way he ruled, i said as soon as i heard it, you know what's going to happen? we're never going to hear from them again. that's what broke up the daca deal. yes, we had a pathway, we had many things. that was getting close to being a deal. the problem was that the money was a very small amount of money. it was 25 and then come back every year. we don't want to go through that every year. but we were getting close. i said as soon as that decision
came down, that incorrect and horrible decision, i mean, there's been a number of them made lately, but as soon as that decision came down, i said you'll never hear from them again. and i called up. i said, hi, it's president trump, what's going on? they say president trump, we don't know who that is. it was over. the deal was over. that's what killed the daca deal. it was nothing else. it was the judge's decision. and if the supreme court does what really everyone thinks from a legal standpoint it should be doing, if they don't allow the president of the united states, which is me also because if president obama is allow to do it, i'm aprllowed to do it also can you imagine, if you supreme court overrules that wrong executive order, we'll have a deal very quickly on daca and other things. and the democrats want that and so do we. but once he ruled that way, it was something you couldn't
really negotiate. >> reporter: mr. president, two questions for you. are you still proud to own this shutdown? >> well, you know, i appreciate the way you say that but once -- i'm very proud of doing what i'm doing. i don't call it a shutdown. i call it what you have to do for benefit and for the safety of our country. but when nancy pelosi said you don't have the votes in congress, i will tell you what i was proud of, i was never more proud of my republican party and those congressmen and women when they they saw that and they got together and they voted 217-185 and it wasn't even close, that was an incredible day, i'm very proud of that when she said you couldn't get the vote. and i'm not holding that against her because despite the fact that i'm not saying it was an easy meeting or even a kind meeting or a nice meeting but in the end i think we've come a long way.
we're going to be working very hard over the weekend and we'll see if we can do something. so can you call it whatever you want. you can call it the schumer or the pelosi or the trump shutdown, it doesn't make any difference to me. just words. >> reporter: mr. president, my second question on federal workers, sir -- >> just one second, please. go ahead. >> reporter: it may be the same question. thank you, mr. president. two questions just to follow up on daca. are you open to a path to citizenship in theory for daca recipients? and then can you explain to federal employees of the agencies that are closed which are not homeland security why those agencies should stay closed. homeland security is significant in and of itself if it stays closed. >> because we want to do what's right and do it all at one time. we don't want to take it in pieces. daca is going to be a great subject. i look forward to discussing it at another time.
there are a lot of great things that can happen if the democrats want to do that. i think we're waiting for the supreme court justices' ruling in a not very long preriod of time. as you know, it's up now. hopefully they will be making a ruling maybe sometime in the summer. before daca, i would like to see what happens. if they rule the way it is, it gives the president too much power. can you imagine me saying that? but i would be entitled to the same power. it's not a correct thing that took place. and president obama never felt it was going to hold up and it held up. but i don't think it's going to hold up at the supreme court. if it doesn't hold up, you're going to see a lot of good things happening because you'll be having daca and putting other thanksgiving with daca. hopefully by that time the wall will be well under construction.
we've already built a lot of the wall. we've been work being veing ver hard. we did a lot of wall in san diego where they needed it very badly and wanted it very badly. so we haven't been sitting still for the first believe it or not less than two years. we've been working very, very hard. the wall is -- we've done a lot of miles of wall already. so we're not just starting off fresh. but we have large numbers of miles that we have to do and we can let gaps because if you have gaps, those people are going to turn their vehicles or the gangs -- they're going to be coming in through those gaps and we should not let that happen. >> kevin, kevin. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president. appreciate that. what is your personal message to those who are impacted by the shutdown and if you wouldn't mind, if you could comment on the remarks made by a freshman congress person about impeachment involving a bit of a
profanity. >> well, you can't impeach somebody that's doing a great job. that's the way i do it. i've probably done more in the first two years than any president, any administration in the history of our country. you look at tax cuts, you look at regulations, you look at what we've done for the vets, you look at the rebuilding of the military and the numbers that we're talking about and many other things, i could give you a list that's pages long. so i think it's very hard to impeach somebody who has done a great job, that's number one. and we even talked about that today. i said why don't you use this for impeachment? and nancy said we're not looking to impeach you. i said that's good, nancy, that's good. but you don't impeach people when they're doing a good job. and you don't impeach people when there was no collusion because there was no collusion. you know russians better than i do, kevin. there was no collusion. i didn't need russians to help me win iowa. i didn't need russians to help me win the great state of
wisconsin and michigan and pennsylvania. i won them because i went there and i campaigned hard and my opponent didn't go there enough. and she lost. a lot of good states. a lot of states that for many, many years for decades have gone democrat, they went republican. that's why i won, not because of russia. >> your comment about the freshman congress person's comments specifically -- >> i thought her comments were disgraceful. this is a person that i don't know. i assume she's new. i think she dishonored herself and i think she dishonored her family. using language like that in front of her son and whoever else was there, i thought that was a great dishonor to her and to her family. i thought it was high lily disrespectful to the united states of america. go ahead. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president. earlier this week you repeated your claim that through the u.s. mca mexico will be paying for
the wall. >> that's right. >> reporter: can you describe the specific mechanik achanisms >> you're going to be seeing it. nafta is one of the worst trade deals ever maybe. we lost millions of jobs. nafta left our country dry. nafta was a disaster. i campaigned on either terminating or renegotiating nafta. bob lighthauser and jared kushner did an incredible job. now we have a deal that's great for our country and good for mexico and canada also. as you know, it's the three countries. we will be taking in billions and billions more money for the united states, including jobs, including companies that won't be leaving us anymore and going to mexico and in some cases canada to a lesser extent, but
we lost 25% of our car business because of nafta. nafta was a disaster. now we have the usmca, the united states, mexico and canada trade agreement. it's brand new. it's totally different. it makes it very difficult for companies to incentivize, move to other countries and we will be making billions and billions a year more money. >> so why not use that for the wall? >> because i didn't have to. that is paying for the wall. many, many times over. in fact, what we save on the usmca, the new trade deal we have with mexico and canada, what we save on that will pay for the wall many times over in two years and three years. i view that as absolutely mexico is paying for the wall and that's fine.
>> yes, ma'am. >> reporter: you ran your campaign promising supporters that mexico is going to pay for the wall, the wall was going to be made of concrete. you just said earlier the wall could be made of steel and right now our government is shutdown over a demand from your administration that the american taxpayer pay for the wall. so how can you say you're not failing on that promise to your supporters? >> very nice question so beautifully asked, even though i just answered it. >> reporter: you didn't answer it. it has not even passed congress yet, sir. >> excuse me, are you ready? i just told you we just made a trade deal and we'll take in billions and billions, the wall is peanuts compared to what the value of this trade deal is to the united states. as far as concrete, i said i was going to build a wall. i never said i'm going to build a concrete. >> reporter: you said concrete. >> i know you're not into the construction business, you don't understand something. we now have a great steel business that's rebuilt in the
united states. steel is stronger than concrete. if i build this wall or fence or anything the democrats need to call it because i'm not into names, i'm into production, i'm into something that works, if i build a steel wall rather than a concrete wall, it will actually be stronger than a concrete. steel is stronger than concrete. can you check it out. listen, if i build a wall and the wall is made out of steel instead of concrete, i think people will like that. and here's the other good thing, i'll have it done by the united states steel corporation, by companies in our country that are now powerful, great companies again and they've become powerful over the last two years because of me and because of our trade policies. so if i have a steel wall or you could call it a steel fence but it will be more powerful than any of the concrete walls that we're talking about. it's possible that it will look
better and one of the things i think you have seen this that's very important for us, very, very important in speaking to border patrol, i.c.e. and local law enforcement and even military, they want to be able to see through it. you can't really see through a concrete wall. they want to be able to see who's on the other side of the wall because if they're here and you have about a 12 inch concrete wall and you have people on the other side but you can't see what's over there, it's very dangerous. they want to be able to see through the wall. a see-through wall made out of steel is far stronger than a concrete wall. so i'm very happy with it. i think -- i think, i'm not sure, but i think that's what the democrats prefer and if it can get them there, i'm okay. it actually will be a more powerful wall and it will be a more beautiful wall than having a concrete wall. >> reporter: so, mr. president, if the new trade deal -- >> jeff, go ahead.
go ahead, jeff. >> reporter: you mentioned china, sir, in your remarks. are you concerned about the word and the actions of apple this week with regard to revenue? can you tell us what sort of progress you meant when you were referring to trade talks with china? >> i think we're doing very well. china is paying us tremendous tariffs. we're getting billions and billions of money pouring into the treasury of the united states, which in history we've never gotten from china, as you know. it's been very unfair. i had a fantastic meeting with president xi, who i both like and respect. one of the things that came out of that meeting of fent nal. they have unbelievably strong prohibitions on drugs. it was not on their list. they view it as some kind of a commercial product. they're going to be changing their laws to make fent nol a
criminal -- a criminal process. if they do that, you know what their ultimate is, it's called the death penalty. i thanked president chi very much -- president xi very much. this was a meeting that was supposed to last for about 45 minutes and it ended up being almost four hours, some of you were there. it was a great meeting. we'll see what happens. you never know with a deal. but i will tell you, china is not doing well now and it puts us in a very strong position. we are doing very well, but we're taking in billions and billions of dollars and i hope we're going to make a deal with china. and if we don't, they're paying us tens of billions of dollars worth of tariffs, not the worst this evening in the worl thing in the world. i think we will make a deal with china. i think they want to. i think they sort of have to and i think we're going to have a
great relationship. i think that president xi and myself have a great relationship. also north korea, we're doing very well with north korea. that's based on relationship also. >> one more quick one. >> reporter: just to follow up, apple issued a revenue warning this week which led its stock to go down and the rest of the stock market to go down as well. are you concerned about that? >> no, i'm not. they've gone up hundreds of percent since i'm president. they're going to be fine. apple is a great company. look, have i to worry about our country. apple makes their product in china. i told tim cook, who is a friend of mine who i like a lot, make your product in the united states, build those big, beautiful plants that go on for miles it seems, build those plants in the united states. i like that even better. apple makes its product in
china. china is the biggest beneficiary of apple, more than us, because they build their product mostly in china. now he's investing $350 billion because of what we did with taxes and the incentives that we created, in the united states, he's going to build a campus. i want to get those companies to come back like so many are doing into the united states. i want apple to make their iphones and all of the great things they make in the united states and that will take place. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president. i want to ask you two questions. one, as you talk about the wall, eminent domain. many of those who own property on the southern border will lose their property because of this. and once this happens, they say that they could go to court with you for years. it could take years. n also, what is the safety net for federal workers? you're saving months and
possibly a year for this shutdown. do you have a safety net for those who need their checks, those who need s.s.i. and what have you? >> i really believe that these people, many of the people that we're talking about, many of the people you're discussing, i really believe that they agree with what we're doing. and we can have this -- april, we can have this fixed very quickly. this can happen by early next week. we're going to be working over the weekend. we can have a solution to this but i wanted to keep it all at one point. and i think a lot of the people that you're referring to, april, are really wanting that to happen, too. i believe a lot of them want to see border security and they're willing to give it up. the people i had in yesterday represent most the border patrol. the people yesterday at the news conference represent most of border patrol. every one of them said don't even think about us, get this
fixed, that is doing the great thing for our country. as far as eminent domain, you're right, 100%. eminent domain is very interesting. without eminent domain, you wouldn't have any highways, any schools, any roadways. what we're doing with eminent domain is in many cases we'll make a deal up front, the secretary has done a lot of that and if we can't make a deal, we take the land and we pay them through a court process, which goes actually fairly quickly and we're generous. otherwise you could never build anything. if you didn't use eminent domain, you wouldn't have one highway in this country. you have to use eminent domain. it's actually something you don't want to use it but if you're going to do a stretch. as an example, on pipelines and other things, you have to use eminent domain, otherwise you'd never be able to buy the land. if we had one person out of hundreds, then we wouldn't be able to build proper border security because we'd have that
big opening i was talking about. what happens is some are paid up front, you make a deal up front and we're willing to do that in all cases and when they're unwilling to make a deal, which also happens, then you go to court but in the meantime we're able to build the border security. so i think it's a fair process. i think it's a process that's very necessary but it's fair. >> reporter: couldn't that hold up your wall? >> no because untder the militay version of eminent domain and national security, we can do it before we even start. a lot of times we'll make a deal. i would say a good percentage of the times we're making deals. a lot of the money we've been given has already been spent on purchasing the land, the right of way. it's essentially a right of way. so we are very, very far along on that. but eminent domain is something that has to be used, usually you would say for anything that's long, like a road, like a pipeline or like a wall or a
fence. okay? thank you. good question. it's a good question. please, go ahead. >> reporter: two questions. first, mr. president, have you considered using emergency powers -- >> should we keep this going or not, folks? i just don't want them to say, oh, he stood out there. you have so many questions. i'm looking at mike and steve and -- more important, madam secretary. >> none of us brought coats. are you cold? get out of here. take mine. do you want mine? should we keep this going? first -- let me know when you get tired. >> reporter: have you considered using emergency powers to build this wall without congressional approval? >> yes, i have. and i can do it if i want. >> reporter: so you don't need congressional approval to build
the wall? >> absolutely, we can call a national emergency. i haven't done it. i may do it. i may do it. we can call a national emergency and build it very quickly. it's another way of doing it. if we can do it through a negotiated process, we're giving that a shot. >> reporter: is that a threat hanging over the democrats? >> i never threaten anybody but i am allowed to do it. >> reporter: on mexico, the benefits of the trade deal will go to private companies and private citizens. you're talking about tax revenues. >> they' >> i'll give you an example. when a company was going to leave for mexico, or canada but mexico, we lost tremendous car business like 25% to mexico. if they stay, all of those taxes that they have been paying, real estate taxes, sales taxes,
employ employee, employer taxes, tremendous taxes that nobody even understands they pay, they're tremendous, income taxes, federal income taxes, state income taxes in some cases, all of those taxes stay with us. the wall is -- you know, it's great but the usmca, which gives a disincentive for companies to leave, it's a tremendous disincentive, anybody that leaves after this deal is done, look, it's one of the primary reasons that i like it. because i can live prenafta, too. the only thing i can't live with is nafta. i can live prenafta, before nafta, before everybody left new england and left all of the different places, ohio, pennsylvania. you still have empty steel factories all over the place and other factories. i can live prenafta very easily. but the only this evening ing i living with it prenafta.
>> those are american taxpayer dollars which you consider mexico paying for the wall? >> many, many types over. the usmca will make in the form that we right now are losing approximately -- hard to believe and this doesn't include the drugs pouring in, which is probably a much higher number than anyone would know, in addition to destroying lives and families so horribly, we are losing close to $100 billion a year on trade with mexico for many years. not only that, they have a tax of 17%. we don't have a tax. so they have a value-added tax of 17%. we don't have a tax of 17%. that deal was bad the day it was made. because they charged a tax before the deal was made and we didn't. it was an obsolete deal when it was made like 30 years ago, whatever it was. no, no. all of this stuff is changing now. this is a fair deal.
this is a good deal for mexico. frankly, oil companies and other companies have an incentive now to go to mexico and take oil out. and that's why we're keeping gasoline prices so low. you look at what's going on with gasoline prices. i mean, it's rather incredible. if you look back four months ago, oil hit $83 a barrel. 83. it was heading to a hundred and then it could have gone to 125. you want to see problems, let that happen. after i made some phone calls to opec and the opec nations, which is essentially a monopoly, all of a sudden it started coming down. i'm very happy with what's happened and i'm very happy that people are paying a lot less in many cases than $2 a gallon for gasoline. you look at what's happening. everyone's talking about -- didn't happen by luck, it happened through talent. go ahead, go ahead, go ahead.
>> reporter: if this shutdown, sir, does last since you'd come back for the second question, months or years, i want to understand how you expect federal workers to last that long without getting a paycheck, specifically since your cabinet members are set to get raises tomorrow. how is that pair? >> we' -- fair? >> we'll have to talk to the cabinet members. they probably don't even know this. >> reporter: will you ask them to give that money back? >>ly do whatev i will do whatevo do. if we have to stay out for a very long period of time, that's what we'll do. and many of those people who will not be getting their money in this moment, those people are the biggest fan of what we're doing. >> reporter: how do you know that? >> reporter: mr. president, the $10,000 raise that your cabinet members and senior administration officials are due to receive starting tomorrow, will you ask them not to accept
that, at least during the shutdown? >> well, i might consider that. you know, that's something i may consider. that's a very good question. who else is out there, mike? who do you see out there that's always been very fair to us? >> reporter: are you committing to that, mr. president? are you committing to that? >> go ahead. good. go ahead. no? that's all right. mike likes you. mike highly recommended you. this will be the killer of all. >> reporter: you were a landlord. for people that are worried about paying their rent checks, government employees, and people worried about bill collectors, would you ask those companies, the landlords to go easy -- >> i think they will. >> i think that happens. i've been a landlord for a long time, in the real estate business for a long time, when you see there are problems and difficulties out there, the people are all good for the
money, ne wothey would with peo. >> reporter: so you would encourage landlords -- >> i would encourage them to be nice and easy. we have a bigger subject to deal with, the security of our country, including terrorism. >> reporter: one more. thank you, sir. >> go ahead. come on. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president. i had a question about the terrorism. i wanted to ask who are these individuals who are being captured terrorists? are they people on the watch list? are they from travel ban countries? a second question i wanted to ask, why is senator mitch mcconnell not here? why was he not invited? >> he's been great. first of all, he was here. he was with us for hours at the meeting. >> reporter: why is he not here right now? >> he's running the senate. mitch mcconnell has been fantastic. he has been really great. he's right at the top of everything that we're doing and he's really been fantastic. do you want to answer that
question about the terrorists? >> sure. obviously i can't get into classified information but what we do know is cdp has stopped over 3,000 what we call special interest aliens trying to come into the country on the southern border. those are aliens who the intel community has identified are of concern. they either have travel patterns that are identified as terrorist travel patterns or they have known or suspected ties to terrorism. so we have 3,000 that we know about. i think what the president continues to make clear is it's our sovereign duty to know who comes into our country without any kind of a structure and without changing the laws, we have no way to know the identity of every person that walks across the secured border. the ones we know about i can give you 3,000. we'll look to what else we can give you, there's obviously investigations ongoing i can't get into. >> so i think that we can say with surety i think it was a
great meeting. we'll see what happens. it may get solved it, may not get solved. you now know the number. you now know what we're willing to do and if we have to do it, we'll do it. again, we're going to be i believe very productive over the weekend. we have a very talented group, they have a very talented group of people and i think some tremendous things will happen. i really believe the biggest beneficiaries of what we're doing are children, are women, are workers and a lot of these people that really do benefit are not only the people in our country but the people that travel up trying to get into a country that they think they're going to get into and they can't. and they get sick and there's tremendous damage done to them and their families. these are all tremendous beneficiaries of what we're doing. so this really does have a higher purpose than next week's pay. and the people that wouldn't get next week's pay or the following
week's pay, i think if you ever really looked at those people, i think they'd say, mr. president, keep going, this is far more important. i want to thank you all. we'll see you soon. they'll be working very hard over the weekend. thank you very much. >> there you have it. the president again answering quite a number of question there is in front of the white house press corps. a couple of headlines that jumped out at me. gloria borger, thanks for having with me we'll chat in a second. the question was so you don't need congressional approval to build a wall? the president said absolutely, we can call a national emergency, i haven't done it, i may do it, we can call a national emergency. the follow-up question was is that a threat hanging over democrats, he said i never threaten anybody but i am allowed to do it. then i want to